Dismissed¶50

Rafishah v. the Union of India, Rep.by, Senior Intelligence Officer

Bail – NDPS Act – Section 37 twin conditions

Madras HC12 Feb 2026CRL OP/8036/2025

Download

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Madras High Court, K. Rajasekar J., 12-02-2026; Crl.O.P.Nos.8036 and 18087 of 2025; bail petitions under S.483 BNSS by A4 Rafishah and A5 Shaike Fareed Pasha in C.C.No.45 of 2025 (II Additional Special Court for EC and NDPS Act Cases, Chennai); 2.700 kg Amphetamine seized from A1-A3 on 20.06.2024; S.67 NDPS statements, whatsapp screenshots, CDR/tower location, Inner Line Permit (Myanmar link); S.37 NDPS twin conditions not satisfied; bail refused; petitions dismissed.

What did the court decide?

The Court held that there are materials to link the petitioners (A4 and A5) with the seized contraband and with the arrested accused, based on tower location analysis of their phones and other materials produced by the prosecution. ¶41

Rafishah Vs the Union of India, Rep.by, Senior Intelligence… — Narcotics (NDPS) | Madras HC (2026)

¶1

Crl.O.P.Nos.8036 and 18087 of 2025

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

¶3

DATED: 12-02-2026

¶4

CORAM

¶5

THE HONOURABLE MR JUSTICE K. RAJASEKAR

¶6

CRL OP NOS.8036 and 18087 of 2025

¶7

Rafishah Shaike Fareed Pasha

¶8

... Petitioner in Crl.O.P.No.8036 of 2025/ A4 ... Petitioner in Crl.O.P.No.18087 of 2025/ A5

¶9

¶10

Union of India, Through The Intelligence Officer, Narcotics Control Bureau, Chennai Zonal Unit, Chennai – 600 077. (NCB F.No.48/1/16/2024/NCB/Madras)

¶11

... Respondent

¶12

Prayer in Crl.O.P.No.8036 of 2025: Criminal Original Petition filed under Section 483 of Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, to grant bail to the petitioner/accused in C.C.No.45 of 2025 pending on the file of the learned Principal Special Court under EC and NDPS Act, Chennai.

¶13

Prayer in Crl.O.P.No.18087 of 2025: Criminal Original Petition filed under Section 483 of Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, to grant bail to the petitioner/accused in C.C.No.45 of 2025 pending on the file of the learned II Additional Special Judge, NDPS Act, Chennai.

¶14

For Petitioner in Crl.O.P.No.8036 of 2025 : Mr. S. Kasirajan

¶15

For Petitioner in Crl.O.P.No.18087 of 2025 : Mr. T.S. Sasi Kumar

¶16

For Respondent(s) in all Cases : Mr. N.P. Kumar Special Public Prosecutor

ORDER

1/6

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

¶21

Crl.O.P.Nos.8036 and 18087 of 2025

¶22

The petitioners/ Rafishah and Shaike Fareed Pasha were arrested and remanded to judicial custody on 09.11.2024 and 08.11.2024, respectively in C.C.No.45 of 2025 on the file of the II Additional Special Court for EC and NDPS Act Cases, Chennai, for the offences punishable under Section 8(c) r/w 22(c), 28 and 29 of NDPS Act, 1985, seek bail.

¶23

The case of the prosecution is that on 20.06.2024 at about 22:40 hours, based on a specific information, the officers of Narcotics Control Bureau, Chennai Zonal Unit went to new College Road Fly over, Royapettah, Chennai and intercepted a car bearing Registration No.TN-03-Z-8176, in which A1-Ramesh, A2-Abdul Gaffar and A3-Mohamed Noog Musharf were travelling; that after complying all the mandatory provisions of the Act, the said vehicle was searched and 2.700 kilograms of white crystal substance believed to be Amphetamine were seized from A1 to A3; that the seizure proceedings were concluded at about 02:10 hours on 21.06.2024; that thereafter A1 to A3 were summoned, they appeared before the NCB officer concerned and their voluntary statements were recorded under Section 67 of the NDPS Act on 21/22.06.2024 and subsequently, A1 to A3 were arrested on 22.06.2024 at 09:30 hours, 10:00 hours and 10:30 hours, respectively and remanded to judicial custody; that the statements recorded from A1 to A3

¶24

2/6

¶25

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

¶26

Crl.O.P.Nos.8036 and 18087 of 2025

¶27

revealed that, the seized contraband was given to A2 by A4-Rafishah in Bangalore; that thereafter, surveillance was made regarding the movement of

¶28

A4 and the respondent had identified A4, conducted preliminary enquiry with him and thereafter, A4 was directed to call A5-Shaike Fareed Pasha to come to A4's hotel; that on arrival of A5, both A4 and A5 were summoned and they were taken to NCB office and their statements under Section 67 of the NDPS Act were recorded, which revealed the involvement of them in the aforesaid offence; that thereafter, A4 and A5 were also arrested and remanded to judicial custody. Hence, this case.

¶29

The learned counsels appearing for the petitioners herein/ Rafishah (A4) and Shaike Fareed Pasha (A5) submitted that the petitioners have been falsely implicated in this case only based on the confession of the co-accused/ A1 and they are in judicial custody since November 2024; that there is no recovery effected from the petitioners herein and the respondent had failed to comply the mandatory procedures to be followed in the course of their arrest; that the petitioners have no previous cases under NDPS Act; that the investigation of the case is also completed and final report filed in C.C.No.45 of 2025; that the trial has not yet commenced and sought for bail to the petitioners.

¶30

3/6

¶31

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

¶32

Crl.O.P.Nos.8036 and 18087 of 2025

¶33

The learned Special Public Prosecutor appearing for the respondent while opposing the bail to the petitioners, reiterated the prosecution case; that the petitioners herein are arrayed as A4 and A5. He further submitted that upon investigation, it is revealed that the petitioners and other accused were all working together as a group for illegal trafficking of contraband; that the contraband seized from A1 to A3 is of commercial quantity and there are bank transactions, whatsapp screenshots, CDR details and other materials available to connect the petitioners/A4 and A5 in the offence, hence rigours of Section 37 of the NDPS Act is applicable to the case of the petitioners; and that the investigation of this case has been completed and final report filed in C.C.No.45 of 2025 pending trial on the file of the II Additional Special Court for EC and NDPS Act Cases, Chennai.

¶34

I have considered the submissions made on either sides and

¶35

perused the materials available on record.

¶36

It is the case of the prosecution that, A4 had handed over 2.700 kilograms of contraband to A2 at Bangalore, which has been seized in this case; that further seizure of mobile phones of A4 and A5 and their whatsapp screen shots reveals that they were in close contact with other accused and they had actively participated in transportation of the seized contraband. The

¶37

4/6

¶38

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

¶39

Crl.O.P.Nos.8036 and 18087 of 2025

¶40

Temporary Inner Line Permit recovered from A5 shows that, he had procured the contraband from Myanmar and brought it to Chennai in association with one Kamaruddin Shah. Further there are end to end encryption feature of whatsapp to establish the case that, the seized contraband was transported originally from Myanmar and thereafter, it was brought to Chennai. Further there are frequent phone calls made between A1, A2 and A4. The location wise analysis of the call details made between A4 and one Kamaruddin Shah and to various persons were also been recovered and all these details were also produced in the complaint by the prosecution.

¶41

All the above facts, clearly reveals that A4 and A5 were in constant touch with other accused, who were arrested with the contraband. Further, the location wise analysis were also done and the prima facie against the petitioners herein were established by producing the tower location of their respective phones, hence this Court is of the view that there are materials to link the petitioners herein with the seized contraband and also with the arrested accused.

¶42

K. RAJASEKAR, J.

¶43

stn

¶44

Considering the above aspects, this Court is of the view that the

¶45

5/6

¶46

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

¶47

Crl.O.P.Nos.8036 and 18087 of 2025

¶48

petitioners have failed to satisfy the twin condition contemplated under Section 37 of the NDPS Act, for the purpose of availing bail in this case, hence this

¶49

Court is not inclined to grant bail to the petitioners.

¶50